Dr Who

(27-12-2012 03:51 )mellover Wrote:  OK, since when did the sontaran become the comedy sidekick? those things scared the living daylights out of me when I was a kid.

Perhaps you have hit the nail on the head with what is wrong with Dr Who at the moment. It makes me wonder if the producers and scriptwriters ever watched the shows when they were little. It seems these days that they are more intent on taking the piss out of the established enemies than making them sinister and scary.
They need to keep it simple-bad guys threaten and kill; Doctor saves the day and vanquishes the enemy. Currently it seems that its more important to understand the human, tender side of the Doctor.....who of course is an alien being!
Yes the Daleks look like pepper pots, the Icemen of Mars looked like lobsters and the Sontarans could get a job as Mr Potato head but the menace and fear they held half scared the crap out of most young children in the 60's 70's and 80's

I was confused and a little bit fed up with the Doctor Who Snowmen episode.

Firstly, as mentioned already, no explanation as to how a Sontaran has become a comedy sidekick. That was a bad start to the show. Too comedic, too slapstick. Yes of course there has to be some elements of humour in the show, but this current era is getting too over the top.

The villains were shit - Richard E Grant was underused - they could have done so much more with an actor of his quality. Same for Ian McKellen as the voice of that snow globe thing - WTF???!!

And to cap it all off - the newly introduced companion dies only to come back again, only to after all die in the end - but then the Doctor races off to an unspecified time (admittedly probably revealed in the new series) to find Clara - even though she's lying dead on the dining table. We saw a descendant of Clara's (Oswin) in the Asylum of the Daleks in the last series who also died... So the Doctor races off to find her again - why the hell would there be a third version in yet another time zone... my head was in knots at the end.

I wonder if Stephen Moffatt is just over complicating things but in doing so succeeding in alienating the show's fans. I understand the excitement in being head writer of Doctor Who - who wouldn't want to do the role - but its just too over the top. Very disappointed.

I'm thinking that the tears of rain means she has become linked to the energy that was behind the snow/ice, so she will never really die, as there will always be an incarnation of her...if that makes sense. I'm hoping she remembers him when he finds her again.

i thought it was a good episode and one of Moffat’s better ones, i liked that the big bad was one of the dr's old foes, last seen if i remember right sending yeti into the London Underground (nice touch using the underground map in the episode although i don't know how many people go it),

i liked the new new tardis as it looked more of a classic and good for the anniversary year,

(27-12-2012 16:04 )Regenerated Wrote:  And to cap it all off - the newly introduced companion dies only to come back again, only to after all die in the end - but then the Doctor races off to an unspecified time (admittedly probably revealed in the new series) to find Clara - even though she's lying dead on the dining table. We saw a descendant of Clara's (Oswin) in the Asylum of the Daleks in the last series who also died... So the Doctor races off to find her again - why the hell would there be a third version in yet another time zone... my head was in knots at the end.

Clara is the same woman who was the Dalek, she existed in both times and that what gets the dr going as if she is in 2 different times then she must be in more time lines if the dr can find her ( some of the stuff she said when dieing proved she had some knowledge of what happened on the Dalek prison)

and wasn't it great to see the dr's face in the new titles

(27-12-2012 20:04 )winsaw Wrote:  i thought it was a good episode and one of Moffat’s better ones, i liked that the big bad was one of the dr's old foes, last seen if i remember right sending yeti into the London Underground (nice touch using the underground map in the episode although i don't know how many people go it),

i liked the new new tardis as it looked more of a classic and good for the anniversary year,

(27-12-2012 16:04 )Regenerated Wrote:  And to cap it all off - the newly introduced companion dies only to come back again, only to after all die in the end - but then the Doctor races off to an unspecified time (admittedly probably revealed in the new series) to find Clara - even though she's lying dead on the dining table. We saw a descendant of Clara's (Oswin) in the Asylum of the Daleks in the last series who also died... So the Doctor races off to find her again - why the hell would there be a third version in yet another time zone... my head was in knots at the end.

Clara is the same woman who was the Dalek, she existed in both times and that what gets the dr going as if she is in 2 different times then she must be in more time lines if the dr can find her ( some of the stuff she said when dieing proved she had some knowledge of what happened on the Dalek prison)

and wasn't it great to see the dr's face in the new titles

Having thought a bit more about it and looking up the episode on Wikipedia, then reading it through twice, I can see what you're saying, some of it kind of makes sense. But I still just didn't get the need for all the complexity in the first place. I think they're still making it too complicated and trying to be too clever, and I don't think there's enough people who are going for Smith's doctor, not friends I speak to anyway. It could be kept simpler and still be as effective.

Hopefully the loose ends will be clarified further in the new series. For me though, the Christmas episode was a disappointment. I wanted more from the companions (minus the slapstick comedy and the lovey dovey shit) and more from the villains (they weren't used enough or made evil enough).

(27-12-2012 16:29 )skully Wrote:  I'm thinking that the tears of rain means she has become linked to the energy that was behind the snow/ice, so she will never really die, as there will always be an incarnation of her...if that makes sense. I'm hoping she remembers him when he finds her again.

That makes better sense than many suggestions I've read

Didn't get round to watching this until yesterday, and it was a bit iffy, really, too many niggles to mention (except REG and McKellen, who were lousy).

I didn't mind Strax the Sontaran, the thing is it's a problem that goes back at least to Trek: NextGen and probably earlier - the need to remodel villains/monsters as quite nice, really (it's a common trait in wrestling, oddly). So we get years of the formidable Borg, until they cast a hot chick as one, and then that's alright. Here, we're supposed to forget the warmongering Sontarans because they've now been made into dwarves for some idiot's amusement (and do not start me on the bloody redone Silurians).

There were some good moments, although I felt it was pretty familiar stuff, and the intrigue about Clara's true identity fills me with dread & foreboding (bloody hell, River Song was boring enough, do we need that again?)

Humbug "Room on the Broom" was much, much better than this.

Well first and foremost I also throughly enjoyed the Christmas edition of Doctor Who having watched it yesterday via my smart tv. Got to say Doctor Who's new companion is an absolute babe. It's helped me get over the departure of Karen Gillan quicker now

Also I can't believe the amount of negative posts on the current series and Christmas special. I'd just like to add I thought the old Doctor Who series from the 70's and 80's back in the bad old day's with their wobly sets and very bad acting which is not a patch on what is now very visually pleasing aswell aswell as finely acted out turning each episode into a very sleek production.

Also on the subject of time travel, it's full of paradox's and Steven Moffat should be applauded for it as I find him to be a very clever writer. Also I'm glad to see he is giving the dalek's a rest only ever using them very occassionaly.

Doctor Who is one of the very few things that makes paying for your TV Licence worthwhile.

(31-12-2012 18:20 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I'd just like to add I thought the old Doctor Who series from the 70's and 80's back in the bad old day's with their wobly sets and very bad acting

That was part of the charm though. And a lot of the acting was none too shabby either, my doctor (being the first I saw) was John Pertwee, a fine actor, and of course, nobody will ever beat Tom baker who replaced him, even though Mat does run him a very close second.

The show returns to BBC1 on March 30th, or in 9 weeks' time

Can't wait. I'm eager to see the loose ends from the Christmas episode clarified.

There's nothing wrong with Smith's doctor, I've said that. I just feel that the current writers try too much sometimes, make it too complicated when its not really necessary. But at the same time I understand why they want to throw in as much as possible, as I've said, its totally understandable anyone creating Doctor Who stories to be excited about the project.

Also nothing wrong with the early series - I'll never knock previous actors. The 70s and 80s episodes were so charming, so exciting - more early tv that allows us all to be big kids. I haven't had the pleasure of watching enough of the really early Hartnell and Troughton stories - but I've got a load on dvd to watch and I'm kind of making it a mission to add the entire collection to my dvd stock. My favourite doctor was always Peter Davison - with Tom Baker, David Tennant and Christopher Eccleston brilliant in the role too.

On another note - does anyone have any thoughts of who could be the next doc? Not that I'm wishing Smith away - just thinking ahead for the future.